Salvo from South Carolina: Darn voters thinking for themselves again

posted at 7:40 pm on January 22, 2012 by J.E. Dyer

There are several explanations we’re likely to hear about the outcome in South Carolina on Saturday. Most of them will involve the voters being silly and not knowing what’s good for them. (I especially like the variant that says South Carolina voters went for Newt Gingrich – Newt Gingrich! – because they’re right next to Georgia. Yeah, right. Gingrich is Mr. New American South.)

If the voters weren’t silly, they would understand that it has to be Mitt Romney, because, well, primary voters were silly and picked Christine “I am not a witch” O’Donnell over Mike Castle in Delaware, not to mention running with that goofy Sharron Angle in Nevada, and look how that turned out. You can’t get California and you probably can’t get New York, if you’re the GOP nominee. But you have a good shot at Pennsylvania and Ohio, Michigan and maybe even Illinois, if you’re Mitt Romney. Newt Gingrich? Forget it. Gingrich can’t even win Georgia.

And the truth is, this analysis isn’t necessarily wrong. If I had to make a bet, I’d bet that a Newt Gingrich nominated to run for the GOP in November would implode on the campaign trail. He’d still make a better president than Obama, but his “sticking it to the media” shtick in the debates would lose its luster when he faced Obama. He comes across as easily annoyed; the feistiness that resonates with voter sentiment in the primaries would weather time and tides poorly. As between an irritable Gingrich and a cool, scripted Obama, I would predict without hesitation that the latter’s jokes during a debate would come off better. All things being equal, that is.

As with the O’Donnell-Castle primary outcome in 2010, however, it’s not the voters who are silly. They know that all things aren’t equal in 2012. The voters who put Gingrich over the top yesterday believe that we can’t keep going down the same political path in the United States – and that that holds for Republicans at least as much as for Democrats, if not more. Their perception is that the GOP leadership is invested in the current path of government: that it doesn’t want change; it is not committed to restoring liberty and limited government, but instead is comfortable with the growth of regulatory intrusiveness, and seeks merely to broker pragmatic accommodations to leftist activism as a sort of rear-guard action.

Considering that the GOP has been doing this for most of the last 80 years, the voters aren’t wrong. They aren’t wrong about Mitt Romney: his record of enthusiastic accommodations to the left is a set of rusty, clanking weights tethered to the back of the Mitt-mobile. Gingrich and Santorum both have some ‘splainin’ to do as well, but Gingrich has specifically repudiated some of his earlier faux pas (such as the snuggle-up with Nancy Pelosi on combating “global warming”). He also speaks trenchantly on the issues that exercise the most voters: federal debt, health care regulation, regulation in general, government intervention in the economy, illegal immigration.

It does matter to primary voters, moreover, that Gingrich “takes it to” the media by rhetorically denouncing the questions posed in the GOP debates. Voters on the right perceive the one-sided political attitude of the media to be a significant problem for American politics. And while I don’t get as excited as others do about Gingrich’s little rhetorical broadsides in the debates –responding with broadsides isn’t, per se, a component of leadership – this is another thing the voters aren’t wrong about. Media bias is a problem, not only in politics but for our public life in general. People believe a lot of things that aren’t so today because of the particular narratives favored by the major media. The perception of public assent generated by the media’s formulations produces an environment for government taking actions that jeopardize our liberties.

Many voters are determined not to be ruled by federal executive agencies whose agendas are approved by MSNBC and the New York Times. These voters are voting for the candidate they deem most likely to reverse America’s slide into precisely that method of government. That they see such a candidate in Newt Gingrich speaks more loudly about the general state of the GOP than about anything else. Voters are seeking to break the inertia and conventionalism of the Republican Party; this is, in fact, a power struggle, and one in which I would not bet against the voters.

The famous salvo from South Carolina in April 1861 precipitated a shooting war under old conditions that no longer prevail. The Union had all the material advantage in that war, as it had the moral advantage in being determined to preserve the national union while ending slavery.

But today’s South is no longer under such a disadvantage. A political salvo from the South is a different portent now. Likewise, the Republican Party doesn’t hold a Union-like advantage over its members, nor is there any valid reason for our federal government to hold such an advantage over a law-abiding people. Today’s “rebel” GOP voters in South Carolina aren’t the slave-regime old guard, they’re the abolitionists. We need not be deceived that wanting to reverse the encroachments of the federal government, and defeat the plantation mentality in Washington, is evidence of irresponsibility or lawlessness. The truth is closer to the opposite.

The people have one tool – the vote – by which to express the sentiment that things have to change. In 2008, Mitt Romney didn’t look all that different from George W. Bush. The Obama tenure has been a wake-up call that has put Romney in a new perspective: in 2012, he doesn’t look as different from Barack Obama as conservative voters would prefer. Obama is less an outlier than the end-gamer of the same big-government principles embraced by both major parties over the past 80 years. We have now seen with our own eyes where those principles lead, and the voters don’t want to go there. It’s not the voters who need to wise up; it’s the Republican Party.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Exactly. Newt’s smart enough to know how Reagan did it and follow along. Just watch. Look for him to make a big issue out of energy independence, and use Obama’s pipeline decision to contrast. I don’t see Romney doing this.

Yes, Obama has been transforming American to a socialistic state. Conservatives understand this.

But the people who will decide this election – independents – don’t understand this and they don’t want to hear about a “counter-revolution.” They want someone who will fix the economy.

People at this site are bright, civic-minded, attuned to public affairs, and are aware of the dangers we face. Rergrettably, most Americans do not have this understanding, and calls for “revolution” will frighten them, not secure their vote. The winning strategy is to lay out a different future with economic growth and a strong national defense. We can educate them AFTER we win the White House; doing so before-hand will walk into a trap by the MSM.

Mitt Romney does not fight his own fights he sends his minions!
Obama does not fight his own fights he sends his minions!
Romney can’t buy enough minions to negate Obamas media wing of the DNC!
Newt knows he must defeat both Obama and his media water carriers!

Why? What word would you use instead of “perception?” Is there some other word that you think is more accurate?

PatriotGal2257 on January 22, 2012 at 9:33 PM

“The voters who put Gingrich over the top yesterday believe Know that we can’t keep going down the same political path in the United States – and that that holds for Republicans at least as much as for Democrats, if not more.

Their perception isThey See that the GOP leadership is invested in the current path of government: that it doesn’t want change; it is not committed to restoring liberty and limited government, but instead is comfortable with the growth of regulatory intrusiveness, and seeks merely to broker pragmatic accommodations to leftist activism as a sort of rear-guard action.”

You see, the word believe indicates that they have no proof of it. The word perception is more in lines of a preparatory of then saying otherwise. It is just simple fact that these things are true.

Forget the horrible spin the author is trying to get you to swallow (and having moderately successful results), the one thing that can be taken away from the primaries so far is this: despite the lamenting of a lack of conservatives/conservatism by people who consider themselves to be conservative, they continually vote for non-conservatives. This will not change.

People at this site are bright, civic-minded, attuned to public affairs, and are aware of the dangers we face. Rergrettably, most Americans do not have this understanding, and calls for “revolution” will frighten them, not secure their vote.

Even if I were interested in your Fabian Conservatism, a conservatism that dare not speak its name, a conservatism ashamed of its own core principles, a double-agent mole conservatism, I would not trust Willard to be the one to deliver it when his only achievement to date is a program of policy functionally identical to ObamaCare, i.e. RomneyCare, with all its new rules, its new taxes, its exchanges, and its mandates.

Oh, and Newt is a racist man. Calling Obama the Foodstamp President was a salvo to his blackiness.

carbon_footprint on January 22, 2012 at 8:22 PM

*snort* Seriously though, I know a couple of people who were flat out insulted by this comment of his. They had to get help for a couple of months, and were very glad it was there for them. I wonder how that comment is REALLY playing across the nation?

OT, your pics are really wonderful. My favorite is the B&W tree in the fog, makes me want to start a short story, beginning there ;-)

and need more anti-establishment Repubs to push our hope and change thru, Boner fumbles at every turn, McTurtle is less than useless as voice. If we get WH and Congress, then in 2016 it will be a repeat of 2008. It’s easier to be against something than for it. The President is the face, we’ll lose momentum if it’s a Repub.

Win the States, then the States can stand up, those in Congress can rise up. This is our moment. Limited Federal Government, Federal Reserve, Wall Street, Lawyers…those are the ones who attempt to overlord, they don’t have power unless we consent. Through the States we will take back what was usurped. Scumbags are local, State, and Federal…start close to home, it will filter up.

The way I see it; none of the remaining candidate are well qualified to be posterboys of Conservatism. They’ve all got their blatant heretical transgressions.

I’m pulling for Romney as the remaining governor in the race. Before him, I was pulling for Perry, and before him, Pawlenty. Apparently, my support doesn’t count for much, but there it is. Executive experience matters, in my opinion.

mr. dyer grossly oversimplifies newt’s message. you don’t aquire exit poll results like newt’s without a complex message. i suggest mr.dyer go back and watch the debates and see how many take aways newt gives to people and stop focusing on just the touchdowns. then he may understand newt’s appeal. hillary clinton had bad numbers but i never heard this panic about her. if the establishment doesn,t stop this meddling their going to have one nasty situation on their hands. i live in MA where we have no choice. it really sucks including the time when mitt was “serving”

mr. dyer grossly oversimplifies newt’s message. you don’t aquire exit poll results like newt’s without a complex message. i suggest mr.dyer go back and watch the debates and see how many take aways newt gives to people and stop focusing on just the touchdowns. then he may understand newt’s appeal. hillary clinton had bad numbers but i never heard this panic about her. if the establishment doesn,t stop this meddling their going to have one nasty situation on their hands. i live in MA where we have no choice. it really sucks including the time when mitt was “serving”

2) Gingrich is a revolutionary with all the lack of sobriety that implies. This makes him perfect for an electorate in near rebellion against the establishments of both parties which Dem pollster Doug Shoen properly and in horror called “pre-revolutionary.”
Bart DePalma on January 22, 2012 at 8:14 PM

That’s money. The anger is palpable – we are SICK of the media fellation of Obama, and they don’t even try to pretend anymore. We’re sick of being insulted, falsely accused, falsely blamed, demonized, and ROBBED of our security, our financial futures, and control over our own destiny. Newt is the only one who GETS THAT.

we are SICK of the media fellation of Obama, and they don’t even try to pretend anymore. We’re sick of being insulted, falsely accused, falsely blamed, demonized, and ROBBED of our security, our financial futures, and control over our own destiny. Newt is the only one who GETS THAT.

Harbingeing on January 22, 2012 at 10:52 PM

He’s unelectable. setting your hair on fire because you are angry isn’t going to get rid of obama.

Newt will take it to Obama in an aggressive way that Romney never would or could. Hopefully Newt takes on a true Conservative running mate and hopefully the tea party rises again to hold Newt to conservative/constitutional principles. Maybe a very interesting convention.

had romney had the balls to face patrick we might have some insight on his electabilty. as of now we have seen him lose running to the left of teddy beat a total neophyte woman (actually more a girl) while gathering an eyepopping 49.5% of the vote and losing to an under funded mccain. now he has been routed in the first gop base state to an underfunded newt who he outspent 2 to 1. this political sport just might not be his game. we’re only going to get obama on stage afew times and we must expose him then. MAYBEMITT is not up to that job. daddy’s dream is just gonna go unfullfilled

:) You are like three of several hundred of our new hatchings that are awesome.

carbon_footprint on January 22, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Thanks! There has to be 3 of me! I’m the dummy of the group…The computer is for reading what I can’t find in my regular media. The keyboard, computer and me are the water going into the pan on fire, on the stove, with the crease. By the time I get done reading everything, and then answer someone…the three of me are 3 pages behind. Some of these people can carry on a conversation as if they are on the phone! ( At work I just need ADP and an email…so my kids show me the cut and paste…Axe told me about the quote thingy…and libturdordie seems smitten with my abilities…so I’m going to let ‘it’ home school me! (:>)

Haven’t seen even a hint in the nearly 6 years I’ve been coming to this site. Hell will freeze over first. And no pictures of that town called Hell that froze over last year. I mean the spiritual place.

Media bias is a problem, not only in politics but for our public life in general. People believe a lot of things that aren’t so today because of the particular narratives favored by the major media. The perception of public assent generated by the media’s formulations produces an environment for government taking actions that jeopardize our liberties.

It’s not just a problem; it’s a HUGE problem. Quite possibly our BIGGEST internal problem. In fact, if that’s all Gingrich could do in his administration, that is, to focus the national spotlight on media bias and make it a serious issue, he have done more long term good for the country than anything The Contract With America had ever accomplished.

Oh, and Newt is a racist man. Calling Obama the Foodstamp President was a salvo to his blackiness.

carbon_footprint on January 22, 2012 at 8:22 PM

False..

After losing my job because of a work injury, we were on them for a couple of years till my SSD came through. I know three other families who qualify, two working, and all are white. This nonsense of it being al a code word for black is bulsh*t. The dems have to say that, might even believe it, some of them. But from our side?

Really?

I worked in grocery retail in this town in Ohio 31 years, and not once in that time, were most not white. We don’t see it as racial, and if you do,. it probably has more about a dislike for Newt than race about it.

“Their perception is that the GOP leadership is invested in the current path of government: that it doesn’t want change; it is not committed to restoring liberty and limited government, but instead is comfortable with the growth of regulatory intrusiveness, and seeks merely to broker pragmatic accommodations to leftist activism as a sort of rear-guard action.”

Amen! Every time the GOP talks about maintaining hundreds of bases overseas, needing an ever larger bureaucracy to “implement” new changes or talks about needing to “accommodate” illegals, the anger grows. The fight is to return to a very limited Government, not making the Federal government “work”.

Oh, and Newt is a racist man. Calling Obama the Foodstamp President was a salvo to his blackiness.

carbon_footprint on January 22, 2012 at 8:22 PM

More Racist than Rev Wright and his 10 points of “Blackness”?

Whites have let themselves be convinced that it is racist merely to object to dispossession, much less to work for their own interests.
Never before has a people been fooled into thinking that there was virtue or nobility in surrendering its heritage, and giving away to others its place in history; only whites have been tricked into thinking that love for their own people is somehow “hatred” of others.

*snort* Seriously though, I know a couple of people who were flat out insulted by this comment of his. They had to get help for a couple of months, and were very glad it was there for them. I wonder how that comment is REALLY playing across the nation?

LazyHips on January 22, 2012 at 10:06 PM

When starting out with a young family, and not yet finished with college, we had to go on foodstamps for a few months. I was glad to get the help, even though I was appalled at most of the others that expected it as a perk.

If foodstamps are indicative of the number of people needing assistance, then his bragging about having the most people on foodstamps ever, is really his way of bragging that the most people have needed assistance under his presidency than under any other President.

He’s unelectable. setting your hair on fire because you are angry isn’t going to get rid of obama.

V7_Sport on January 22, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Newt’s unelectable because some poll(s) taken 9 months before an election say so? Get real. The political landscape changes constantly and the public’s approval of political candidates changes faster than the remote can click to the Kardashians. He’s unelectable because you prefer Mitt and want to whine about others who don’t agree.

we are SICK of the media fellation of Obama, and they don’t even try to pretend anymore. We’re sick of being insulted, falsely accused, falsely blamed, demonized, and ROBBED of our security, our financial futures, and control over our own destiny. Newt is the only one who GETS THAT.

Harbingeing on January 22, 2012 at 10:52 PM

I would add: Newt is the only one FIGHTING against that. Conservatives are tired of licking our wounds in the corner while Republican leaders kiss up to Democrats and the media. If you, V7_Sport, want to continue licking your wounds in the corner, go ahead. Most Conservatives are tired of it and want the fight. BRING IT ON!!

Newt’s unelectable because some poll(s) taken 9 months before an election say so? Get real.

JSGreg3 on January 23, 2012 at 7:18 AM

No Newt’s unelectable because is of low character, corrupt, mean egotistical with an uninterrupted 40 year track record of playing the DC game of crony capitalism, self-aggrandizement and nanny state programs.

Gingrich and Obama debates go to the One because Newt comes across as easily annoyed??

Worst opinion in years. It is the mighty messiah that puckers up to hide his hatred for all that refuse to bow before his majestic self. He wears his (passive) hatred and anger on his face like a lousy actor and you accuse Newt of having that problem. Oh well, I suspect some reason had to be applied as to why Newt won’t win.

Newt supporters envision some grand debate where the little boy President is suddenly shut down and proven to be the fraud he is – it ain’t gonna happen. The debates will be so structured that these grand moments will be minized. Newt can “challenge” all he wants but it won’t do any good and he like any GOP candidate will be mocked away by the MSM as Mr. Insider with ethical problems.

With Newt, the GOP will be running another angry white guy – what’s new about that? The Democrats will have a ball with Newt and his wives and his ethics and being tossed from Congress. Sure the GOP right wing is mad as hell and not going to take it any more. And isn’t that clip of angry Reagan fun? And if Newt loses it will all be because the RINOs preferred to lose than support their “guy” – who really isn’t their guy, who really isn’t a true conservative, who really isn’t an outsider – he’s just some convenient guy who is not Romney. So now I’m supposed to vote for the guy who has 3 wives, has ethics violations and pedals his DC influence? Oh yes, he’s not Romney. So our GOP pomposity is better than Democratic pomposity? Yeah, a real contrast – a guy who spent his life in DC and thinks too much of himself. Huzzah! ;-)

Let’s not forget the exceptional achievements legislatively of Newt’s past. He forged some powerful conservative laws during that time.

And then he threw it all way. Newt is one of those people so brilliant they have never had to learn discipline, and depend on quick thinking to bail them out of all difficulties. Clinton was also like that. Ultimately, these people crash and burn.

Consider: Newt is so disorganized that he couldn’t even get on the ballot in Virginia. Can this man win a race? Can he govern a nation? He couldn’t even govern the House. The Clinton impeachment fiasco lost the Newt and the House all credibility with the American people.

Newt is a car with a thousand horsepower, and no suspension or steering.

Consider his PAC’s attacks on Romney for being part of Bain. He’s attacking a successful businessman for being a successful business man? That’s appalling. That’s shameful. This is the tactic of a liberal Democrat, not a Republican.

Like many other conservatives I wish it were someone besides Newt. He’s as greasy and syphilitic as they come for a modern politician. His two greatest qualifications are that he’s quick on his feet, and he isn’t Mitt. That said, I don’t care if they find a sex-trafficking ring, a pallette of rock, and a dozen young boys buried in the walls of the eventual nominee’s D.C. townhouse, I’ll be pulling the lever for them in November – with gusto.

J.E. – I have to say that was the most “scattered” post on this topic that I have yet to read. Take a stand, support a principle, and stick to it.
We all know the variables. Most of us have taken a stand.
Now, some might say, defecate or vacate the commode, but …
Have it your way.

Do you not understand the difference between analysis of the situation and stumping for a particular candidate? This was an analytical post. I have taken a very definite stand: that the people voted for Gingrich because they hear him making the case about government that’s important to them. They see Romney as just one more “approved” candidate who isn’t listening, and doesn’t understand that all will be lost if government continues on the path it’s on.